Keene v. White
| Decision Date | 15 October 1883 |
| Citation | 136 Mass. 23 |
| Parties | Augustus W. Keene v. William A. White |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Worcester.
Exceptions overruled.
H. L. Parker & G. H. Mellen, for the respondent.
T. G. Kent, for the petitioner.
OPINION
The Superior Court has power to "grant reviews of judgments rendered before a trial justice, or police, district, or municipal court, in any case in which a review might be granted if the judgment had been rendered in the Superior Court." Pub. Sts. c. 187, § 25. In this case the petitioner seeks to review a judgment rendered against him by the Third District Court of Southern Worcester in an action of tort in the nature of trover. He attempted to appeal from this judgment to the Superior Court, but, having failed to file a bond as required by the St. of 1882, c. 95, § 1, his appeal was invalid; the Superior Court had no jurisdiction of the case under the appeal, and the judgment of the District Court stood as a final judgment. Santom v. Ballard, 133 Mass. 464. We can have no doubt that it is within the power of the Superior Court to grant a review of this judgment. The power given to that court is broad and comprehensive, and enables the court to revise any judgment in the cases provided for by the statute, which in justice ought not to stand, if it has been rendered without laches of the petitioner for review and he has no other remedy against it.
If he has a right of appeal, the court will not grant a review, because the remedy by appeal is more direct and simple. But if, without laches, he has lost his right of appeal, the court may grant a review upon good cause shown. Bowditch Ins. Co. v. Winslow, 3 Gray 415. Hutchinson v. Gurley 8 Allen 23. Fuller v. Storer, 111 Mass. 281.
The only question presented by this bill of exceptions is whether the Superior Court had the power to grant a review. Having the power, it was for that court to decide whether a sufficient cause existed for the exercise of the power.
Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manzi v. Carlson
...151 Mass. 321, 23 N. E. 1136;Soper v. Manning, 158 Mass. 381, 384, 33 N. E. 516;City of Boston v. Robbins, 116 Mass. 313;Keene v. White, 136 Mass. 23;Hunt v. Simester, 223 Mass. 489, 492, 112 N. E. 76;Marsch v. Southern New England Railroad Corporation, 235 Mass. 304, 305, 126 N. E. 519. Th......
-
Handy v. Tibbetts
...is hardly just and equitable to leave him to the trouble and expense of a writ of review, which he no doubt could maintain, as in Keene v. White, 136 Mass. 23. this case, however, he lost his right of appeal by failure to file this bond, and then brought a writ of review. But it will be fou......
-
Smith v. O'brien
... ... application here. The facts stated in the bill of exceptions ... are proper ground for granting review. Keene v ... White, 136 Mass. 23. The court, having found as a matter ... of fact that petitioner was entitled to a review, necessarily ... found as a ... ...
-
Putnam v. Boyer
...connect this bond with the case at bar, have maintained an action thereon against its signers. Santom v. Ballard, 133 Mass. 464;Keene v. White, 136 Mass. 23;Wheeler & Wilson Manuf'g Co. v. Burlingham, 137 Mass. 581. But the plaintiff is not compelled to submit to the manifest inconveniences......